<p>my school -
4.6 is considered top of class (no one this year has this i believe). 4.4+ is in the top 5% or so. the people in this area have 2300+ SAT's, 800/800 for sat subjects is expected for peopel in this area, not uncommon. the most rigorous schedule is ~8 ap classes over 4 years, and that includes doubling up on science ap's. plus the school doesnt tag "honors" onto classes like geometry.</p>
<p>this site - people have 4.6 ~ 4.8, yet SAT's are in the <2200 range.<br>
i know that you can do well on the sat and badly in school and vice versa, but i think it goes to show that really you cannot just base things off of gpa, and that a test like the sat/ap are needed to balance things.</p>
<p>Yes, I agree. Throw in a mix the fact that my son's school does not even do it on 1 - 4+ scale, but out of 100 instead. APs get extra 10 points, so at the end of junior year he had 101.000 (that precise).
Personally I like the class rank better for comparison purposes. Although I am prejudiced (I come from a family of valedectorians).</p>
<p>You're right, but don't worry: there are something like 100+ different methods that high schools use to compute GPAs, depending on where the % breaks come; whether grades are reported as letters or percentages; values assigned to + and - grades; different weighting schemes (or lack of same); number of honors and APs offered; et al. </p>
<p>The good news is that admissions readers are very sophisticated at factoring in all of these variables, plus the quality of your high school, and the rigor of your classes. Even without standardized test scores, they'll have a pretty good idea of where you stand compared to other applicants.</p>
<p>Yeah I've never heard anywhere near a 4.8 at my school or from anyone I know around here. The letter grades you recieve in your courses are usually on your transcript, as our IB Coordinator pointed out about weighting, the first thing she sees when she looks at a transcript are the letter grades. If you have above a 4.0 and a bunch of grades less than As, it is going to be obvious to anyone that there was weighting going on. I mean let's give the adcoms some credit here. </p>
<p>Your letter grades and the percentage you're in for your class (what your GPA is in the context of your school) are probably more important for most adcoms than your weighted GPA. Your course selection is also obvious from your transcript and very important. So even if the school doesn't weight at all, then first of all your school profile probably tells them that, and they will see lots of advanced courses with decent grades but an average class rank could be explained by students by taking easier courses and therefore earning easier As. For example at my school they will see that junior year IB classes aren't weighted so even though I took 7 last year I won't have a weighted GPA really. They aren't going to compare my unweighted to someone's 4.8 junior year, that would be kind of silly.</p>
<p>yeah, that's why SAT/AP scores should count more for college admission =/. GPA is too subjective. I'm pretty sure that half of our school can be valedictorian at any "regular" high school.</p>
<p>At my school the highest GPA that anyone can get is a 4.3 if they take all AP/honors. So yeah, a 4.3 at my school is a 5.0 in most public schools.</p>
<p>My high school does GPA on a 9-point weighted scale (specifically to avoid comparisons with other high schools). So my GPA is an 8.5 weighted. I really like the system.</p>